Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (9006 total)
53 online now:
AZPaul3, jar, Percy (Admin) (3 members, 50 visitors)
Newest Member: kanthesh
Post Volume: Total: 881,281 Year: 13,029/23,288 Month: 754/1,527 Week: 55/138 Day: 4/24 Hour: 1/1

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!!
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 78 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 541 of 713 (865381)
10-24-2019 2:37 AM
Reply to: Message 540 by AZPaul3
10-24-2019 2:20 AM


Re: Carbon Sequestration.
OK but then we can address each of those situations with the carbon-grabbing technology separately without having to butt heads with the producers of the fossil fuel, no?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 540 by AZPaul3, posted 10-24-2019 2:20 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 542 by AZPaul3, posted 10-24-2019 3:54 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 544 by Taq, posted 10-25-2019 1:28 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 546 by RAZD, posted 10-28-2019 12:23 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5336
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 542 of 713 (865389)
10-24-2019 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 541 by Faith
10-24-2019 2:37 AM


Re: Carbon Sequestration.
OK but then we can address each of those situations with the carbon-grabbing technology separately without having to butt heads with the producers of the fossil fuel, no?

Sequestration alone will not solve the problem. Burning fossil fuels is the problem and needs to be *drastically* reduced. There is no way to do that without costing Big Carbon $$billions. They will not allow that to happen. And they have the means to stop it.

The best way I know of to reduce emissions by the amounts needed is through a carbon tax levied on the refineries and coal mines. That would drastically increase the cost of gasoline, oil, heating fuel, natural gas, coal, shale oil.

This will spur improvements and efficiencies in alternatives like electric cars, solar for homes and businesses, alternative electric generation. More and more people would switch to avoid the higher costs.

To offset the cost to the less fortunate in our society a tax refund equal to the average cost increase would be given. But only to those making less than some number, say $200,000.

Additionally, the new taxes would fund tax incentives to utilities to switch to alternative power sources and would fund R&D into more efficient vehicles and additional alternative power sources and sequestration technologies.

But Big Carbon has a stranglehold on our political institutions. And the voting public, dumb as a stump, is too disposed to their propaganda and manipulation to change that. We're screwed.

Those of us here will not be around for the bad stuff, but, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will have it much harder than we as ecosystems and social systems come under the strain of near collapse. In the short term, 200-500 years, those poor souls will suffer greatly. In the long term ... well ... the only thing that will be left is for whatever remains of humanity to take a comfortable seat, bend over real far and kiss their ass goodbye.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 541 by Faith, posted 10-24-2019 2:37 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18772
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.8


(1)
Message 543 of 713 (865403)
10-24-2019 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 533 by Faith
10-23-2019 8:23 PM


Re: Carbon Removal Technology? Anybody heard about this?
Faith writes:

It was said on the radio and went by very fast. Somebody mentioned that there is now some kind of technology that can remove carbon from the atmosphere.


Even here in the backwoods of Saskatchewan we've been experimenting with carbon-capture for years. I just heard on the news recently that somebody is experimenting with sequestering captured carbon in concrete buildings. And so on.

You really need to get a better source of news.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 533 by Faith, posted 10-23-2019 8:23 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 545 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-26-2019 12:50 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8430
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 6.3


(2)
Message 544 of 713 (865460)
10-25-2019 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 541 by Faith
10-24-2019 2:37 AM


Re: Carbon Sequestration.
Faith writes:

OK but then we can address each of those situations with the carbon-grabbing technology separately without having to butt heads with the producers of the fossil fuel, no?

Good ol' thermodynamics still raises its head. When we add oxygen to long chain carbon molecules in fossil fuels we get energy, carbon dioxide, and water out of that reaction. If we want to run it in reverse, then we have to add energy. If we use fossil fuels to sequester carbon dioxide, then we aren't gaining anything. In fact, it would probably increase the carbon dioxide in the air because it wouldn't be 100% efficient.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 541 by Faith, posted 10-24-2019 2:37 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3832
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 5.5


(2)
Message 545 of 713 (865496)
10-26-2019 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 543 by ringo
10-24-2019 12:01 PM


Cement production releases a lot of CO2 to atmosphere
Maybe there is some twist to help the problem, but...

quote:
Carbon concentration in cement spans from ≈5% in cement structures to ≈8% in the case of roads in cement.[53] Cement manufacturing releases CO2 in the atmosphere both directly when calcium carbonate is heated, producing lime and carbon dioxide,[54][55] and also indirectly through the use of energy if its production involves the emission of CO2. The cement industry produces about 10% of global man-made CO2 emissions, of which 60% is from the chemical process, and 40% from burning fuel.[56] A Chatham House study from 2018 estimates that the 4 billion tonnes of cement produced annually account for 8% of worldwide CO2 emissions.[57]

Nearly 900 kg of CO2 are emitted for every 1000 kg of Portland cement produced. ...


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cement#CO2_emissions

Moose


This message is a reply to:
 Message 543 by ringo, posted 10-24-2019 12:01 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 38 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 546 of 713 (865623)
10-28-2019 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 541 by Faith
10-24-2019 2:37 AM


Carbon Sequestration. OR Grow HEMP
Faith, this may be what you heard about:

quote:
MIT Scientists Say They Found a New Way to Scrub Atmospheric CO2

Carbon Capture

A team of MIT engineers claims to have figured out how to scrub harmful carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, potentially giving the world a new weapon in the fight against climate change.

While many scientists argue that carbon capture technology is a necessary part of preventing the worst effects of climate change, current approaches to the tech have never scaled enough to be practical. Now, the team — which founded a company called Verdox to commercialize its system — thinks it may have cracked the code. By sending air past an electrically-charged plate of carbon nanotubes, they say, the system can literally suck CO2 out of the atmosphere.

Scaling Up

The key to the MIT researchers’ carbon capture system is that it requires much less energy —it could theoretically be built up to an industrial scale without requiring so much heat that it ends up harming the environment, according to research published in the journal Energy & Environmental Science.


ie -- it may or may not be a net benefit.

Easier and more cost effective is to use proven technology to produce renewable energy electricity and to reduce the use of fossil fuels in all manufacturing and energy generation.

Hemp can replace plastics and fuels. Growing hemp also reduces CO2 more than the same acreage of trees, and provides a reliable crop for farmers. win-win.

... without having to butt heads with the producers of the fossil fuel, no?

Only if they get their heads out of their butts and join the human race plans for survival instead of profits.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 541 by Faith, posted 10-24-2019 2:37 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5336
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 547 of 713 (869131)
12-23-2019 11:18 PM


Worse than we thought
New study shows global warming, even within the target 2oC, will cause greater climate changes than previously expected. Due to the land warming faster than the oceans over the short term, human population and growing regions will be under greater stress than initial indications.

quote:
Using climate model simulations, researchers have shown that short-term, rapid warming will cause up to 91 percent of people on Earth to experience higher local temperatures. Plus, under this scenario, the likelihood of extreme heat events is at least twice as high in some areas.
.
.
.
And judging by our progress so far, that seems the most likely scenario. Greenhouse gases are continuing to surge worldwide, so much so that last year, scientists compared them to a "speeding freight train".

We do actually have the tools to slow that train down - it just looks like we need to act even faster than anyone suspected.


Here's How We're Making That 2C Global Temperature Increase Far Worse For Humans

The study abstract: Global and regional impacts differ between transient and equilibrium warmer worlds

This, also, will fall on deaf ears as short-term greed continues to rule business, governments and populations.

We're fucked.

Edited by AZPaul3, : added original abstract


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

Replies to this message:
 Message 548 by Faith, posted 12-24-2019 3:26 AM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 78 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 548 of 713 (869135)
12-24-2019 3:26 AM
Reply to: Message 547 by AZPaul3
12-23-2019 11:18 PM


Re: Worse than we thought
Since not a single climate-change prophecy has ever come true, why should we believe this one?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 547 by AZPaul3, posted 12-23-2019 11:18 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 549 by vimesey, posted 12-24-2019 3:43 AM Faith has responded
 Message 552 by RAZD, posted 12-24-2019 9:27 AM Faith has responded
 Message 553 by Theodoric, posted 12-25-2019 12:26 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1176
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 549 of 713 (869136)
12-24-2019 3:43 AM
Reply to: Message 548 by Faith
12-24-2019 3:26 AM


Re: Worse than we thought
Are you happy for that argument to be applied to biblical prophecies ?

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 548 by Faith, posted 12-24-2019 3:26 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 550 by Faith, posted 12-24-2019 3:49 AM vimesey has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 78 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 550 of 713 (869137)
12-24-2019 3:49 AM
Reply to: Message 549 by vimesey
12-24-2019 3:43 AM


Re: Worse than we thought
Does it help climate change prophecy to come true if you change the subject?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 549 by vimesey, posted 12-24-2019 3:43 AM vimesey has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 551 by vimesey, posted 12-24-2019 3:51 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1176
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


(4)
Message 551 of 713 (869138)
12-24-2019 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 550 by Faith
12-24-2019 3:49 AM


Re: Worse than we thought
I notice you avoid the question.

But here’s a page of evidence it took me two seconds to find:

Analysis: How well have climate models projected global warming? | Carbon Brief


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 550 by Faith, posted 12-24-2019 3:49 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 38 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(5)
Message 552 of 713 (869145)
12-24-2019 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 548 by Faith
12-24-2019 3:26 AM


Worse than we thought, effects already seen.
Since not a single climate-change prophecy has ever come true, ...

Like the "prophecy" of average temperature increases that have occurred for the last several years, each year outdoing the previous years?

quote:
Climate Change: Global Temperature
Rebecca Lindsey and LuAnn Dahlman
September 19, 2019

Given the size and tremendous heat capacity of the global oceans, it takes a massive amount of accumulated heat energy to raise Earth’s average yearly surface temperature even a small amount. Behind the seemingly small increase in global average surface temperature over the past century is a significant increase in accumulated heat. That extra heat is driving regional and seasonal temperature extremes, reducing snow cover and sea ice, intensifying heavy rainfall, and changing habitat ranges for plants and animals—expanding some and shrinking others.

Change over time

Though warming has not been uniform across the planet, the upward trend in the globally averaged temperature shows that more areas are warming than cooling. According to the NOAA 2018 Global Climate Summary, the combined land and ocean temperature has increased at an average rate of 0.07°C (0.13°F) per decade since 1880; however, the average rate of increase since 1981 (0.17°C / 0.31°F) is more than twice as great.

The 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998, and 9 of the 10 have occurred since 2005. The year 1998 is the only year from the twentieth century still among the ten warmest years on record. Looking back to 1988, a pattern emerges: except for 2011, as each new year is added to the historical record, it becomes one of the top 10 warmest on record at that time, but it is ultimately replaced as the “top ten” window shifts forward in time.


Like the "prophecy" of sea level rise that has the city of Miami rebuilding roads at higher elevations so they don't flood?

Miami’s fight against rising seas
Miami is racing against time to keep up with sea-level rise

Like the islands that have disappeared due to sea level rise?

Rising seas swallow Pacific islands

The sea is rising because it is being warmed, and warmed water expands. Simple physics. This is augmented by the melting of glaciers (ice that was resting on land) due to higher average temperatures and changes in air temperature distributions (changing jet stream, warmer polar regions, etc).

Then there are the increased size, severity and number of fires around the world. Australia, for example, with new record temps recorded and then superseded.

'Catastrophic' fire alert in two Australian states
50C temperatures could become the norm in Australia as hundreds of climate records broken in 90 days, report finds
How is Australia tackling climate change?

You have to be willingly ignorant to not be aware of a single effect of climate change.

... why should we believe this one?

Because it is based on science and facts, not wishful thinking.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .

Edited by RAZD, : ..


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 548 by Faith, posted 12-24-2019 3:26 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 554 by Faith, posted 12-25-2019 1:30 AM RAZD has responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7051
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005


Message 553 of 713 (869173)
12-25-2019 12:26 AM
Reply to: Message 548 by Faith
12-24-2019 3:26 AM


Re: Worse than we thought
Facts and evidence prove that you are an idiot or a troll or both. Facts and evidence disprove the premise of your statement.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 548 by Faith, posted 12-24-2019 3:26 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 78 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 554 of 713 (869176)
12-25-2019 1:30 AM
Reply to: Message 552 by RAZD
12-24-2019 9:27 AM


Re: Worse than we thought, effects already seen.
So I guess we just ignore all the older prophecies that failed completely, and now rely on some much more recent ones that are based on a known trend?

I don't have a problem with SOME rise in temps since I know glaciers have been melting for instance. But I also think in terms of an ice age, just one, that started at the end of the Flood, and encroached very far south before it began to retreat, which it's been doing for some long time. It's now almost completely retreated, and of coruse as it retreats the planet warms.

Not that there mightn't be some human input but the ice age retreat was going to happen in spite of us. Yeah I know....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 552 by RAZD, posted 12-24-2019 9:27 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 555 by RAZD, posted 12-25-2019 10:48 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 556 by jar, posted 12-25-2019 10:52 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 38 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 555 of 713 (869192)
12-25-2019 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 554 by Faith
12-25-2019 1:30 AM


Scientific predictions are not prophecies ...
So I guess we just ignore all the older prophecies that failed completely, and now rely on some much more recent ones that are based on a known trend?

Perhaps because we are talking about scientific predictions rather than belief prophecies.

The difference between science and belief is the ability/willingness to change when new information is available.

When scientific predictions are based on limited or incomplete information, then they will likely need to change when new information is added. Early predictions were based on data that was incomplete or lacking in certain areas -- the arctic/antarctic poles and the deep ocean for instance.

When the predictions don't match the results, the model is revised ... because a model that doesn't predict accurate results is useless.

The first models of hurricane behavior were fairly poor at predicting hurricane paths. The ones we have now are much better (... and they are WAY better than orange-top with a sharpie).

I don't have a problem with SOME rise in temps since I know glaciers have been melting for instance. ...

Cherry picking what evidence you use again? The overall trend shows a sharp increase in the temperatures around the earth commensurate with the rise in CO2 from burning fossil fuels.

... But I also think in terms of an ice age, just one, ...

Except the actual evidence shows many ice ages of different lengths.

quote:
Ice Age

An ice age is a period of colder global temperatures and recurring glacial expansion capable of lasting hundreds of millions of years. Thanks to the efforts of geologist Louis Agassiz and mathematician Milutin Milankovitch, scientists have determined that variations in the Earth’s orbit and shifting plate tectonics spur the waxing and waning of these periods. There have been at least five significant ice ages in Earth’s history, with approximately a dozen epochs of glacial expansion occurring in the past 1 million years. Humans developed significantly during the most recent glaciation period, emerging as the dominant land animal afterward as megafauna such as the wooly mammoth went extinct.

Scientists have recorded five significant ice ages throughout the Earth’s history: the Huronian (2.4-2.1 billion years ago), Cryogenian (850-635 million years ago), Andean-Saharan (460-430 mya), Karoo (360-260 mya) and Quaternary (2.6 mya-present). Approximately a dozen major glaciations have occurred over the past 1 million years, the largest of which peaked 650,000 years ago and lasted for 50,000 years. The most recent glaciation period, often known simply as the “Ice Age,” reached peak conditions some 18,000 years ago before giving way to the interglacial Holocene epoch 11,700 years ago.

At the height of the recent glaciation, the ice grew to more than 12,000 feet thick as sheets spread across Canada, Scandinavia, Russia and South America. Corresponding sea levels plunged more than 400 feet, while global temperatures dipped around 10 degrees Fahrenheit on average and up to 40 degrees in some areas. In North America, the region of the Gulf Coast states was dotted with the pine forests and prairie grasses that are today associated with the northern states and Canada.


Five biggy ice ages and several smaller ones.

... that started at the end of the Flood ...

Which never happened.

... and encroached very far south before it began to retreat, which it's been doing for some long time. It's now almost completely retreated, and of coruse as it retreats the planet warms.

Except that it's the other way around: as the planet warms the ice melts. Ice doesn't melt on it's own and not only do we have more ice melting than before, but there is less snow each year to replenish the ice.

Not that there mightn't be some human input but the ice age retreat was going to happen in spite of us. Yeah I know....

That you are wrong. Again. And it is the details again Faith. The details show that the major contributor to climate change in the last several thousand years is human activity.

That means we should be able to fix it or ameliorate it ... if we get off our hinnies and work on it.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 554 by Faith, posted 12-25-2019 1:30 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020